In Ancient Greece, Rome and Egypt, the general view for society was that if an individual was no longer interested in continuing their existence, society had no right to ensure that they remain alive. The idea of euthanasia, or ending one's life to alleviate physical or mental suffering, has thus been a continual controversy for thousands of years. In modern times, in the 1930s there were organizations that aided in awareness and legalization of voluntary and assisted suicide (the Hemlock Society, the Voluntary Euthanasia Society). The issue became media frenzy in the late 1990s with the media attention surrounding assisted suicide -- and continues to remain a contentious and debated issue. While there is no universal answer for the topic -- much like there are different protocols for different diseases -- it is clear that 21st century morality requires a focus upon the individual's ability to make sound and cogent decisions for their own lives. For some, this may mean placing their faith in a higher power, for others, though, the option to terminate their own life to avoid pain, suffering and burden should be allowed.

Event: Informal debate/conversation presented by the Association for Public Broadcasters.

Transcript: AS: Welcome everyone to tonight's informal debate and discussion on a topic that has been in the news for decades, the idea of the moral nature of euthanasia. In general, euthanasia is a term that has a number of meanings for different disciplines. It is a philosophical subject, a medical issue, a legal contention, and a moral issue that divides people of all ages, races and locations. Essentially, the term means purposefully ending a life in order to alleviate an individual's suffering, pain or discomfort. Passive euthanasia is intentionally withholding treatment or medicine; active euthanasia is assisting in the demise of another human being. Both are extremely controversial, and focus on dozens of issues: what is quality of life? Does a person have the right to choose their time and means of death? What constitutes suffering and who defines this? What if a person so fears debilitation that the prefer death? And what constitutes a painless or "happy death?" While it is unlikely that we will come to an agreement tonight considering the span of disagreement between our two guests, we might ask ourselves if in the 21st century how do we define personal responsibility and the actual definition of life vs. existence.

Our guests tonight are two gentlemen who have written and spoken about the subject for many years. Dr. Mack Kevork is an American pathologist and pro-euthanasia activist. He champions individual rights and has claimed to have assisted over 100 patients in their death saying "dying is not a crime." Dr. Kevork spent 10 years in prison for a direct role in the suicide of a patient on the condition that he not personally assist anyone in terminating their own life. Reverend Jerry Followell, an ordained Baptist Minister, host of his own evangelical television show, and author of a number of books on modern spirituality is a cofounder of the Moral Majority as well as two Christian academies. He has been vocal about his views on pornography, the teaching of evolution, homosexuality, and the notion that only God has the right to decide when a person should live or die. Welcome Gentlemen; let's start first by allowing you to briefly summarize your position on the topic of euthanasia. By a coin toss, Dr. Kevork will begin.

JK: Thank you Alison, for allowing me to be a part of your program tonight. I certainly agree that the subject is of great moral and personal value. We live in a society now in which medical science has now progressed to the point where certain heroic measures can keep a physical body "functioning" for an indefinite period of time, even without any brain activity. Unfortunately, this does not mean that the quality of life for the individual is even apparent. I bring up the case of Terri Schiavo. Mrs. Schiavo was injured and diagnosed as being in a persistent…[continue]

Other Documents Pertaining To This Topic

Heraclitus with support from Plato's dialogues and Seneca's Letters. It has 2 sources.
No matter what one aims at accomplishing in his or her life s/he is still bound by the universal laws that demand actions, whether voluntary or involuntarily, of every one.
Heraclitus says, "the many do not comprehend everyday things, nor do they understand them when they are taught, but they think they do and cling to their opinions."

Plato's Phaedo and STC's "Christabel"
In Phaedo 80ff, Socrates outlines Plato's theory of Forms, particularly attempting to prove that the eternal Forms are of divine origin. Through analogy with the living body and the dead body, Socrates in dialogue with Cebes forces his interlocutor to admit that the body-soul dualism admits to a qualitative difference between the two, and then Socrates begins to describe the separation of body and soul, such

It is very dark in the cave, and everything, including the face of the person next to them, is in deep shadows. It is never mentioned whether the people are happy or sad, or whether they speak to each other. It is assumed that they speak at least enough to put names to the shadows they see on the far wall. According to some, the chains that bind the

Plato's Allegory Of The Cave
If he were simply presenting the idea that humanity is often blind to the fullness and vast resources of the world and what it offers, using the cave as a metaphor would have been enough for Plato to make his point. If the only point was that individuals -- because they are so wrapped up in their own shallow lives, petty distractions, and so loyal to

Plato's (and Socrates') Criticism of Rhetoric in "Gorgias"
In Plato's philosophical work entitled "Gorgias," the philosopher's criticism of the method of rhetoric as a form of persuasion is the primary focus of Plato's written work. In the said philosophical and ethical discourse, Plato uses the character of Socrates as the 'voice' or transmitter of the message that Plato wants to extend to his readers/audience. "Gorgias" is a philosophical discourse in that

Plato's Republic And Justice
Justice is ultimately an unknowable concept, if we accept Plato's ideas of 'form' or the essential nature of concepts. In the Republic, Plato presents several intelligent and well-thought-out discussions about the nature of justice. He refutes the arguments that justice is simply rewarding friends, or asserting the interests of the strong. He ultimately concludes that the goal of life is the pursuit of what is just, and

Plato's Allegory Of The Cave And The Movie The Matrix
Plato's allegory of the Cave and the 1999 Matrix movie share many similarities and look at a similar question of what is real and who has the responsibility to point towards the truth. It is obvious that the creators of the Matrix have inspired quite significantly from Plato's work and putting in a modern contexts, aiming for a different result.
In Plato,